On 15/11/2010 10:54 PM, Patrick McCarty wrote:
Hi Julien,
On 2010-11-15, Julien Rioux wrote:
On 15/11/2010 2:59 PM, Patrick McCarty wrote:
Compiling with debug flags*might* help to narrow down the issue. The
easiest way to compile without optimization is by running autogen.sh
like so
./a
Hi Julien,
On 2010-11-15, Julien Rioux wrote:
> On 15/11/2010 2:59 PM, Patrick McCarty wrote:
> >Compiling with debug flags*might* help to narrow down the issue. The
> >easiest way to compile without optimization is by running autogen.sh
> >like so
> >
> > ./autogen.sh --disable-optimising
>
On 15/11/2010 2:59 PM, Patrick McCarty wrote:
Compiling with debug flags*might* help to narrow down the issue. The
easiest way to compile without optimization is by running autogen.sh
like so
./autogen.sh --disable-optimising
I have done this now, and get the problem again, with little mo
On 2010-11-15, Julien Rioux wrote:
> On 13/11/2010 4:51 PM, Patrick McCarty wrote:
> > If you want to start again with a pristine git checkout (I don't
> > know if this is in the Contributor's Guide yet), the following
> > command sequence usually works for me.
> >
> >make doc-clean
> >mak
Hi Patrick,
On 15/11/2010 2:59 PM, Patrick McCarty wrote:
That being said, this could be a problem with Guile on Ubuntu. As an
additional test, I would try compiling/installing Guile 1.8.7 from
scratch to see if this solves the problem.
I won't try this now, don't have much time.
Can you s
On 2010-11-15, Julien Rioux wrote:
> On 15/11/2010 2:59 PM, Patrick McCarty wrote:
>
> > Can you send the output of running `./autogen.sh --disable-optimising' ?
> > It would be nice to compare that with my output.
> >
>
> Log attached. I'm recompiling at the moment. Will this give me a
> more ve
On 13/11/2010 4:51 PM, Patrick McCarty wrote:
If you want to start again with a pristine git checkout (I don't know
if this is in the Contributor's Guide yet), the following command
sequence usually works for me.
make doc-clean
make distclean
git clean -f -x
Then proceed with ./autogen
Hi,
Sorry for the delay.
On 2010-11-04, Julien Rioux wrote:
> On 04/11/2010 7:34 PM, Patrick McCarty wrote:
> >Are you compiling LilyPond from scratch
>
> by the way for my builds initially I did
>
> git clone git://git.sv.gnu.org/lilypond.git lilypond
> ./autogen.sh
> ./configure.sh
> make
> s
On 04/11/2010 7:34 PM, Patrick McCarty wrote:
Are you compiling LilyPond from scratch
by the way for my builds initially I did
git clone git://git.sv.gnu.org/lilypond.git lilypond
./autogen.sh
./configure.sh
make
sudo make install
Since then I have been doing
git pull
make
sudo make install
On 04/11/2010 7:34 PM, Patrick McCarty wrote:
Are you compiling LilyPond from scratch and using Guile 1.9, by chance?
Sorry that I didn't mention it originally.
I'm compiling the git master from
git://git.sv.gnu.org/lilypond.git
I am running ubuntu 10.10 and installed the dependencies with
a
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 3:57 PM, Julien Rioux wrote:
>
> I've found a strange behaviour using lilypond-book --safe on a lytex file:
> With multiple snippets each containing one \fret-diagram-x markup command,
> compilation works for the first snippet but fails on the next one. Then if
> you run lil
Hi,
I've found a strange behaviour using lilypond-book --safe on a lytex
file: With multiple snippets each containing one \fret-diagram-x markup
command, compilation works for the first snippet but fails on the next
one. Then if you run lilypond-book --safe a second time, it will
successfully
Updates:
Status: Verified
Comment #3 on issue 1281 by brownian.box: enhancement: lilypond-book safe
mode
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1281
This produces no errors (tried with 2.13.38):
lilypond-book --output=out --safe test.lytex
So, verified
Updates:
Status: Fixed
Labels: Patch fixed_2_13_37
Comment #2 on issue 1281 by percival.music.ca: enhancement: lilypond-book
safe mode
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1281
Thanks, it looks fine. I've pushed it as
a672bdf4929d3cca8eec06a58e0ad7982fa
Comment #1 on issue 1281 by julien.rioux: enhancement: lilypond-book safe
mode
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1281
I'm providing a simple patch for this.
Attachments:
safe-mode.patch 1.4 KB
___
bug-lilypond ma
Status: Accepted
Owner:
Labels: Type-Enhancement Priority-Medium
New issue 1281 by brownian.box: enhancement: lilypond-book safe mode
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1281
Reported by Julien Rioux,
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-lilypond/2010-09/msg00318.html
On Wed 22 Sep 2010, 07:52 Julien Rioux wrote:
> Dear list,
>
> This is a feature request for a safe mode for lilypond-book.
Thanks, added as 1281:
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1281
> One can run lilypond with the -dsafe switch to avoid a security risk
> when compiling .ly f
Dear list,
This is a feature request for a safe mode for lilypond-book.
One can run lilypond with the -dsafe switch to avoid a security risk
when compiling .ly files including evil scheme code. There is no
equivalent switch for lilypond-book, and using --process leads to errors.
I'll post be
18 matches
Mail list logo
